tclm 


Duke  University  Libraries 


D03212459Q 


REPORT 


OF    THE 


COMMITTEE  ON  NAVAL  AFFATBS, 

ON  PROMOTIONS  IN  THE  NAVY. 


The  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs  have  had  under  consideration  the 
following  resolution,  referred  to  them  by  this  House  : 

Whereas,  The  recent  action,  under  the  late  law  of  Congress  of 
promoting  officers  "out  of  turn"  has  resulted  in  creating  great  dis- 
content among  many  gallant  and  meritorious  officers  in  the  Navy,  and 
is  considered  injurious  to  the  best  interests  of  the  service.  Be  it 
therefore, 

Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs  be  instructed  to  en- 
quire into  the  necessity  or  expediency  of  repealing,  or  in  some  suita- 
ble manner,  modifying  the  law  passed  at  the  last  session  of  Congress, 
in  regard  to  promotions  in  the  N  i>vy,"  and  beg  leave  respectfully  to 
report : 

That  the  law  referred  to  (that  of  21st  April,  1862,  ch.  68)  creates 
one  new  grade,  (that  of  Admiral.)  and  several  additional  officers  in 
each  of  tt  -.  heretofore  existing  in  the  service.      It  further  pro- 

vides, that  "all  the  Admirals,  four  of  the  Captains,  five  of  the  Com- 
manders, twenty  of  the  1st  Lieutenants  and  five  of  the  2nd  Lieuten- 
ants, shall  be  appointed  "  soldy  for  gallant  or  meritorious  conduct  during 
the  war.-' 

Although,  the  resolution  does  not  specify  the  precise  nature  of  the 
complaints  referred  to,  the  Committee  are  warranted  in  assuming  that 
they  were  caused  by  this  last  clause  in  the  law  ;  in  other  words  that 
many  officers  object  that  promotions  in  the  Navy  should  be  made  "  for 
gallant  or  meritorious  conduct.'" 

The  Committee  cannot  perceive  the  justice  of  this  complaint. 

A  Navy  ia  designed  as  a  means  of  public  defence.  In  examining 
the  expediency  of  a  law  which  relates  to  it,  therefore,  the  first  ques- 
tion to  be  asked  is,  not  when  it  will  affect  individuals,  but  how  it  will 
operate  on  the  public  service.  Now,  it  will  be  admitted  on  all  hands 
that  the  strongest  incentive  that  can  be  held  out  to  "gallant  or  merito- 
rious conduct  in  an  officer"  is  the  hope  of  promotion  ;  yet,  strange 
to  say.  prior  to  the  enactment  of  the  law  referred  to,  rfo  such  incen- 
tive was  held  out  to  the  officers  of  the  Navy,  and  if  it  were  repealed 
none  would  now  bo   hold  out.      While    in    the   army,    talent,    energy. 


I 

courage  and  conduct  arc  sure,  ultimately  to  lead  to  promotion,  BO 
such  avenue  to  distinction  was  open  in  the  Naval  service.  There. 
but  one  pathway  to  promotion  was  to  be  found,  viz  :  the  death  or  re- 
signation of  a  superior  officer.  All  others  were  closed  by  the  inexo- 
rable rule  of  seniority.  The  rarest  talent — the  most  gallant  exploits — 
the  most  distinguished  services,  could  not  advance  him  one  step  in  his 
professional  career,  and  a  grateful  country  could  confer  on  him  no 
other  reward  than  the  expression  of  its  gratitude. 

A  system  better  calculated  to  extinguish  every  spark  of  emulation, 
and  to  repress  the  aspirations  of  generous  ambition  could  scarcely  be 
conceived. 

Nor  was  it  less  injurious  to  the  public  service  than  it  was  unjust  to 
the  meritorious  officer.  "When  the  rule  of  promotion  by  seniority 
alone  is  rigidly  adhered  to,  it  must  often  happen  that  officers  of  the 
least  merit  have  the  highest  rank,  and  on  the  other  hand  that  officers 
of  the  most  exalted  merit  may  be  low  down  on  the  ladder.  Now,  as 
by  another  rule  of  the  service  not  less  inflexible,  every  command 
must  be  proportioned  to  the  rank  of  the  commanding  officer,  it  follows 
that  the  most  important  commands  may  often  devolve  on  the  most 
incapable  officer. 

Such  a  system  might  be  tolerated  in  a  time  of  peace,  or  in  a  country 
whose  Naval  supremacy  might  enable  it  to  get  along  with  any  system, 
however  defective,  but  it  is  ill  adapted  to  a  country  like  ours,  strug- 
gling to  create  a  Navy  in  the  midst  of  a  war  with  a  great  Naval  power. 
On  the  contrary,  the  system  we  should  adopt,  is  that  which  enables 
the  Government  to  place  every  man  in  the  position  he  is  best  qualified 
to  fill. 

This  was  the  object  of  the  law  of  April  21st.  It  seems  to  the 
Committee  that  a  law  which  opens  the  door  of  promotion  equally  to 
all,  affords  no  just  ground  of  complaint  to  any,  and  that  the  only  per- 
sons who  ought  to  complain  of  a  law  which  proposes  to  reward  merit. 
are  those  who  have  no  merit  to  reward. 

If,  as  is  alleged  in  the  resolution,  the  execution  of  the  law  had 
given  just  ground  of  complaint,  this  would  be  the  fault  not  of  the  law 
itself,  but  of  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  carry  it  into  effect.  With  a 
view  of  ascertaining  what  the  action  of  the  Executive  had  been,  the 
Committee,  through  its  Chairman,  addressed  a  note  to  the  Honorable 
Secretary  of  the  Navy — the  answer  to  this  note  is  hereto  appended. 
It  shows  the  action  of  the  Executive  under  the  act ;  whether  that 
action  affords  any  just  cause  of  complaint,  it  is  for  the  House  to  de- 
termine. 

The  Committee  will  only  add,  that'  so  far  from  thinking  the  promo- 
tions under  the  law  of  21st  April,  have  been  too  numerous,  they  are 
of  opinion  that  the  just  claims  of  several  officers  have  been  over- 
looked. 

For  these  reasons,  the  Committee  are  of  opinion  that  the  law  of 
21st  April,  1862,  ought  nots  to  be  repealed. 

No  modification  of  the  law  has  been  suggested,  and  the  Committee 
have  none  to  recommend,  and  beg  to  be  discharged  from  the  further 
consideration  of  the  resolution  referred  to  them. 


'$9 


CONFEDERATE  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 
t  Navy  Department, 

Richmond,  Sept.  1 1th.  1862. 

Hon.  C.  M.  Conr  \d. 

Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Naval  Affairs, 
House  of  Rcprescn tat 'iris, 

Richmond,  Va.  : 

Sir:  Your  letter  of  the  8th  instant,  requesting  that  I  would  inform 
the  Naval  Committee  -what  officers  have  been   promoted  for  "gallant 

or  meritorious  conduct "  under  the  Act,  approved   April    2! 
entitled  An  Act  to  amend  An  Act  entitled  "An    Act  to   provide  for 
the  organization  of  the  Navy,  approved  March,  1861,  and   for   other 
purposes,"  has  been  received. 

I  have  the  honor  to  state,  that  Captain  Franklin  Buchanan  was  pro- 
moted to  the  rank  of  Admiral,  "  for  gallant  and  meritorious  conduct 
in  attacking  the  enemy's  fleet  in  Hampton  Roads,  and  destroying  the 
frigate  Congress,  sloop-of-war  Cumberland,  and  three  small  steamers, 
whilst  in  command  of  the  Confederate  Squadron,  in  the  waters  of  Vir- 
8th  day  of  March,  1862." 
Commander  Raphael  Semmes  was  promoted  to  the  rank  of  Captain, 
" for  gallant  and  meritorious  conduct"  in  capturing  and  destroying 
the  enemy's  commerce  on  the  high  seas,  whilst  in  command  of  the  ( Ion- 
federate  States  Steamer  "  Sumter." 

Lieutenant  Isaac  N.  Brown  was  promoted  to  the  rank  of  Comman- 
der "for  gallant  and  meritorious  conduct"  in  successfully  engaging 
the  enemy's  fleet  on  the  Mississippi  River,  before  the  city  of  vicks- 
burg,  on  the  15th  day  of  July,  1862.  whilst  in  command  of  the  iron- 
clad steamer  "Arkani 

I  am  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

S.    I!.   MA  !, L<>RY. 
Secretary  of  tin'  Navy. 


Hollinger  Corp. 
pH8.5 


